The author is a Forbes contributor. The opinions expressed are those of the writer.

Loading ...

Loading ...

This story appears in the {{article.article.magazine.pretty_date}} issue of {{article.article.magazine.pubName}}. Subscribe

Aereo is looking shaky. And that's great news for the broadcasters whose lucrative retransmission fees it threatens. That is good news for Disney's ABC, Twenty-First Century , , and 's NBC. It might also help and Amazon.

Aereo charges consumers $8 to $12 a month to watch slightly delayed recorded programs. With backing from Barry Diller in 2012, CEO Chet Kanojia has been using "tiny remote antennas to capture broadcast TV signals and store them in the cloud, where consumers can watch them on a device of their choosing — no cable box, no cable bundle and most important, no expensive cable bill," according to the New York Times.

While this saves consumers money, it could cost broadcasters like ABC -- which is suing Aereo -- as much as $3.3 billion that cable companies pay broadcasters to retransmit their content to subscribers.

If enough consumers were to sign up for Aereo, those retransmission fees would approach zero and the broadcasters would suffer a nasty decline in revenue. Meanwhile, to the extent that consumers pay $8 to $12 a month -- instead of $85 for a cable subscription -- the people who write, act, and direct the programs will also end up with a pay cut.

On April 23, Aereo had its day in front of the Supreme Court. And based on the questions from the justices, I would give the edge to ABC -- where Diller's career soared -- in this legal battle.

ABC is arguing that Aereo violates copyright law -- alleging that Aereo steals its content -- that requires the permission of copyright owners for “public performances” of their work including retransmission to the public.

Aereo argues that it is following the same laws that let people record shows on DVRs while it applying that principle to the cloud.

And with Chief Justice Roberts coming down on the side of content filching, I would give the edge in this battle to the broadcasters. According to the New York Times, he told Aereo's lawyer, “Your technological model is based solely on circumventing legal prohibitions that you don’t want to comply with.”

Even liberal Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg seemed to agree with Roberts when she came down on the side of paying people for content. She said, said to Aereo's lawyer, "You are the only player so far that doesn’t pay any royalties at any stage.”

To be sure, these comments do not predict how the court will decide but they appear to tilt the odds against Aereo.

But killing Aereo will not stop the trend of people who cut the cord. According to Experian, in 2013, 18.1% of households with a Netflix or Hulu account cut the cord up from 12.7% in 2010. And more households have cut the cord -- from 4.5% in 2010 to 6.5% in 2013.

Nevertheless, if Aereo loses the court battle, it could be shut down. And that would relieve some pressure on broadcasters' retransmission revenues. Of course broadcasters could respond to an Aereo win by ending wireless transmission of their signals -- thus cutting off Aereo's access to their content -- or starting their own Aereo-like service.

Moreover, Netflix and Amazon could add such a service to their current video offerings.

Of the six companies, Twenty-First Century Fox -- which Diller helped to create -- looks like the best buy. It trades at a Price/Earnings ratio of 14 and its earnings are forecast to grow 29% by June 2015 -- a cheap Price/Earnings to Growth ratio of about 0.5.